Christopher Uggen suggests in his article “Why should felons vote” that “ if those who argue that people with felony convictions shouldn't be allowed to vote because they are untrustworthy in character . . . would we exclude admitted racists or, taking that argument even further, perhaps people who don't know enough about politics?” Uggen illustrates an accurate argument suggesting that if felons are solely not given the right to vote because of the possibility of insightful decisions should we not limit all those who may display a sense of idiocracy from voting polls? Uggen later goes on to demonstrate the point that though “Others argue that ex-felons would somehow vote for a pro-crime agenda. It's difficult to imagine how this would happen, and in fact it hasn't happened in states or even countries where felons can
Christopher Uggen suggests in his article “Why should felons vote” that “ if those who argue that people with felony convictions shouldn't be allowed to vote because they are untrustworthy in character . . . would we exclude admitted racists or, taking that argument even further, perhaps people who don't know enough about politics?” Uggen illustrates an accurate argument suggesting that if felons are solely not given the right to vote because of the possibility of insightful decisions should we not limit all those who may display a sense of idiocracy from voting polls? Uggen later goes on to demonstrate the point that though “Others argue that ex-felons would somehow vote for a pro-crime agenda. It's difficult to imagine how this would happen, and in fact it hasn't happened in states or even countries where felons can